If you love The Daily Beast’s royal coverage, then we hope you’ll enjoy The Royalist, a members-only series for Beast Inside. Become a member to get it in your inbox on Sunday.
Next Sunday, the first episode of the new series of the hit Netflix epic The Crown will be released.
It may have received rave reviews from critics, including The Daily Beast’s Kevin Fallon, but in royal circles the dawn of the new series is being greeted with a stony silence.
ADVERTISEMENT
Officially, the palace won’t deign to be drawn on the thorny question of whether or not the drawing rooms of royal residences across the land, from Windsor to Sandringham, and Kensington to St. James, will be illuminated by the thunk-thunk of the Netflix logo followed by lavish credits of a sprouting golden headpiece when the show returns, ready to run viewers through its own version of the royal story from the years 1964 to 1977.
However, friends of the royals tell The Daily Beast that if the subject comes up in conversation, senior royals are keen to quickly deny that they watch it at all.
However there have been persistent rumors that some members of the family have enjoyed the ultimate guilty pleasure of bingeing on a TV show based—lightly, some would say—on their own family.
Of course, the Windsors have some experience of dealing with TV shows, films, and even plays based on their story. There have been a veritable flurry of them in recent years, including The Queen, The King’s Speech, and King Charles III, which have been met with a similar wall of official ignorance of the work of the magic lantern.
Indeed, while one imagines that all members of the royal family were suitably gripped by Meghan and Harry’s controversial ITV interview last month, the only royal TV show we know for sure they all watch is the Queen’s annual Christmas Day speech. The Queen watches it alone in her study at Sandringham while the rest of the family gather around a TV set up for the occasion in the drawing room.
The Daily Beast understands that the Queen expressed no interest in watching The Crown when it first came out, but did eventually watch a few episodes from Season One.
It was reported earlier this year that Sophie Wessex was partly responsible for encouraging her to watch a few of these initial episodes, which dealt with the death of the Queen’s father and her own accession.
However, it is thought family and courtiers did not urge her to watch the second series, which contained a storyline that lingered on Prince Philip’s supposed reputation as a ladies man, said (incorrectly) that he was a close friend of celebrity osteopath (and pimp) Stephen Ward, and was mixed up in the Profumo Affair.
Will she watch Season 3? Not likely, says a friend, “There’s a feeling that it’s pure poppycock now. The Queen is not remotely interested in these fictions and never has been.”
The palace declined to comment to The Daily Beast on Her Majesty’s Netflix habits, but, last month, the Queen’s communication secretary, Donal McCabe, was moved to write to The Guardian disputing suggestions that tacit approval had been given to the show after its writer, Peter Morgan, said he met with insiders at the palace several times a year.
McCabe’s withering response said: “Your article may have the unfortunate consequence of leading your readers to believe that the television series The Crown is made with some sort of endorsement by the royal household, or an acceptance by the royal household that the drama is factually accurate. We appreciate that readers of the Guardian may enjoy this fictionalized interpretation of historical events but they should do so knowing that the royal household is not complicit in interpretations made by the program.
“The royal household has never agreed to vet or approve content, has not asked to know what topics will be included, and would never express a view as to the program’s accuracy.”
Ouch: fictionalized interpretation of historical events, indeed.
For all McCabe’s denials, however, there is no doubt that Morgan, while taking some liberties with the royal story, has been a more faithful chronicler of the story of the monarchy than many other writers.
His play The Audience, for example, which detailed the weekly meetings between the Queen and her prime minister of the day, is said by sources to be an astonishingly accurate piece of work and the scene in The Queen where Tony Blair meets the Queen to be asked to form a government after his election almost exactly mirrored Tony Blair’s later account of the meeting in his memoirs.
Morgan has described his task as “to join the dots, to find the thread that goes between the pearls,” and has also said: “I make no apology for the fact that most of the time that’s intuitive. I am doing my best—I am sober and I am responsible.”
There is a distinct sense, however, behind palace walls that as the story marches relentlessly toward the present day it is getting perhaps less responsible. Just this week, there was widespread disbelief that the writers had fabricated an entire storyline about a plot to split up Charles and Camilla when they first dated as twentysomethings.
In reality, Camilla and Charles dated briefly, and then split up after Camilla returned to her long-term boyfriend, Andrew Parker Bowles, whom she soon married.
In the new series however, Lord Mountbatten and the Queen Mother are seen (implausibly) conspiring to break up the relationship between Charles and Camilla, believing it to be unsuitable.
There is considerable anxiety, as the Diana era hoves into view, that producers and writers on The Crown will find it increasingly tempting to squeeze such extra dashes of juice to the tale.
McCabe’s letter describing the show as fiction is an attempt to draw a line in the sand, as it is so widely believed to be accurate.
Needless to say, the show itself does little to dispel allegations of authenticity, in fact, it seeks actively to promote its truthful credibility.
For example, one consultant on the show is David Rankin-Hunt, who has a veritable alphabet soup of royal-awarded letters after his name (CVO MBE KCN TD to be precise), and spent 33 years working in the royal household organising, among other things, state funerals.
He claims to have been authorized to co-operate with the palace, recently telling The Guardian: “Before taking up the role on The Crown I was anxious to get the approval of the Palace. Which I obtained.”
He said: “Very senior members of the royal household have said to me, ‘Oh, we love The Crown.’ If there were some indication from on high that it was some kind of scandalous production, that might be reflected in their view, don’t you think?”
The truth is, however, that it has become something of an article of faith for the royals to deny they watch the show.
Olivia Colman, who plays the title role in the new series, claimed Prince William told her he doesn't watch the show: “I asked, ‘Do you watch it?’ He said, ‘No, I don’t.’”
Philip has retired from public life and now lives quietly, on his own for much of the time, at Wood Farm, a small cottage on the Sandringham Estate. “His irascibility is well known and has not diminished in recent years so I can’t imagine anyone would think it would do his blood pressure much good to set up Netflix for him,” says a friend.
A friend of Prince Andrew told The Daily Beast that when he specifically asked the prince if he watched it, the answer came back “no.”
“Of course one wonders, but I don’t have any reason to disbelieve him,” says the source, “It’s such an odd position to be in.”
But then again, few people who know Charles doubt that he will at least want a report on what is contained in the new series of The Crown. He is said to have sent spies to the London production of the play Charles III to report back on how he was being portrayed.
It is hard to believe that Meghan Markle, with her industry background, won’t be tuning in like the rest of us to one of the biggest and most hyped productions of the year—and no doubt wondering how she and her husband will be portrayed when the series catches up with the present day.
